Discussion on:

Use Mondo Rescue to back up Linux servers

I personally use dump for major system backups. The latest version is quite flexible.

Whatever backup system you choose, be sure to run the occasional "fire drill" and make sure you can get files from your backup media. Don't wait until you lose your system to find that your backups are worthless junk. Test them NOW.

For dump, one can use "restore -C" to verify the dump archive against the partition it represents.

It's also a good idea to restore and compare a couple of random files from the archive after an update of backup software, just to make sure that the verify mechanism is working correctly.

Just a note here, but I found the UNIX agent for Veritas is free, and works quite well if you just want to incorporate items to your existing strategy. (Assuming you use Veritas already)

For cheap storage of non-mission critial files I'm using acouple of Samba servers and the ability to just back up the files (and restore to alternate locations in the even of a failure) and so far it's worked like a charm.

Coming, sort-of, from Windows I am in love with the _idea_ of a DriveImage clone -- creating a self-contained set of disks including a boot that will do a bare-metal restore. Back up the data regularly, but at least every month or two get the whole setup. But I think it is time to get with the unix tradition and recognize that using something like dd to send stuff to a backup server, perhaps a swappable drive set for some site security, and a boot rescue disk is the simple and workable way to go.

I have had such love/hate with burning Mondo back ups over a couple years. With my machines running RedHat 7.3 (and constantly altered from up2date upgrades), from month-to-month Mondo would work with this machine, not work with that machine, work with a third machine -- oops, now it isn't working with that third machine or this machine either! It's had me running sorted rpm lists of the machines to try to find out why the working machines work and what different versions of the dependent programs the non-working machines must have -- or not!

It _looked_ like mondo was working like a charm with the machines upgraded to RedHat 9. I try to keep the machines relatively similar considering some hardware and understandable functional differences but just last Friday my wife's workstation was backing up great. Mine crapped out consistently while attempting to fixate the first disk from two starts. WT(Heck) -- because that was yet ANOTHER new error I hadn't yet seen in the couple years of crippling along with this program. Yes, yes. A _verified_ Mondo back up 4 weeks ago on that very machine. NO hardware changes. X-CDRoast (and command line cdrecord) before _and_ after still work FINE which implies I have not developed a problem with the hardware, with cdrecord, or with mkisofs -- SO WHAT _N-O-W_!

Sorry, but I'm coming to the conclusion that Mondo, unfortunately -- and recognizing its good intentions, represents a poster child for the difficulties the open source movement in general and the unix model in particular can _occasionally_ have when one program relies upon about seven other independent programs.